A former Credit Suisse client, Hugo Rey, has lost his case in the Supreme Court against the Swiss banking giant despite the late discovery of evidence that appeared to support his cause.

"/> A former Credit Suisse client, Hugo Rey, has lost his case in the Supreme Court against the Swiss banking giant despite the late discovery of evidence that appeared to support his cause.

" />


Credit Suisse wins case against Lehman Brothers victim

A former Credit Suisse client, Hugo Rey, has lost his case in the Supreme Court against the Swiss banking giant despite the late discovery of evidence that appeared to support his cause.

Rey invested some 50,000 francs ($54,129) in Lehman Brothers in November 2007, less than one year before the bank collapsed.

Rey maintains that he had specifically instructed the bank not to invest in US products on his behalf, and claims his advisor had never mentioned that the bank was American.

In response to the losses made from the Lehman Brothers affair, Credit Suisse offered certain clients, Rey included, compensation of up to 60 percent.

Rey refused the lesser sum, and has since then been pursuing the issue as a matter of principal, at an estimated personal loss of 130,000 francs ($140,747), a sum he described as “my pension” to newspaper Tages Anzeiger.

The court said it had difficulty believing Rey knew nothing of the US aspect to certain of his investments. In particular, lawyers pointed to another US investment, ‘Activest Total Return’, that was made in 2005, the newspaper reports.

“In the court’s opinion, we have listed several indications that show that Mr. Rey’s zero percent US strategy has not been followed consistently,” said Danièle Wüthrich-Meyer, Vice-President of the Bern Commercial Court, which also ruled against Rey.

According to Rey’s lawyer, Michael Lauper, crucial evidence went missing from the commercial court in the form of a product description received by Rey concerning the 2005 investment. Rey said this description, contrary to the bank’s claims, contains no mention of the fact that the company was American.

Rey also maintained that the missing information sheet contains notes written in the hand of the client advisor, suggesting that the advisor, not the client, made the decisions on the investment.  The court has denied that any documents went missing.

Credit Suisse lawyers provided a fact sheet they said the client had received prior to the US investment in Activest Total Return, and which does reflect the US nature of the investment.

Rey, however, pointed out that the sheet provided was dated in 2009 and included a logo, which had only been introduced by the bank on such information sheets in 2006. Sadly for Rey, the realization that this could simply not have been the sheet he had received at the time was only made after the initial trial in the commercial court.

Since the Supreme Court was only obliged to consider evidence presented to the lower court, copies of the relevant documents were not taken into account.

“The Supreme Court made things very easy for itself,” a disappointed Michael Lauper told Tages Anzeiger.

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.


Probe unearths second spying case at Credit Suisse

An internal Credit Suisse probe confirmed Monday that a second executive had been spied on, following earlier revelations that the bank's former head of wealth management was tailed by private investigators.

Probe unearths second spying case at Credit Suisse
Photo: Depositphotos

But Switzerland's number two bank maintained that just one senior leader, who has since been forced out, was entirely to blame for both incidents and that rest of the top brass had not been aware of the activities. 

Releasing the investigation conducted by the Homburger law firm, Credit Suisse said that “it has been confirmed that Peter Goerke, who was a Member of the Executive Board at the time, was placed under observation by a third-party firm on behalf of Credit Suisse for a period of several days in February 2019.”

The probe was launched following media reports last week that spying at Credit Suisse ran deeper than one case.

The banking giant was shaken by the discovery last September that surveillance had been ordered on star banker and former wealth management chief Iqbal Khan.

READ: Credit Suisse boss resigns following spying scandal

Kahn was tailed after he jumped ship to competitor UBS, sparking fears he was preparing to poach employees and clients.

That revelation came after Khan confronted the private investigators tailing him, leading to a fight in the heart of Zurich. Khan pressed charges.

An initial investigation by Homburger blamed former chief operating officer Pierre-Olivier Bouee, who stepped down, but found no indication chief executive Tidjane Thiam was involved.

The probe results released Monday echoed those findings, concluding that Bouee “issued the mandate to have Peter Goerke put under observation.”

“As was the case with Iqbal Khan, this observation was carried out via an intermediary,” it said, stressing that Bouee “did not respond truthfully” during the initial investigation “when asked about any additional observations and did not disclose the observation of Peter Goerke.”

The new investigation also did not find indications that Thiam or others in the board or management “had any knowledge of the observation of Peter Goerke until media reported on it,” the statement said.

“The Board of Directors considers the observation of Peter Goerke to be unacceptable and completely inappropriate” it said, adding that it had issued an apology to Goerke.

It added that “safeguards” were already in place to avoid future similar misconduct. Switzerland's market watchdog FINMA meanwhile said last week that it was “appointing an independent auditor to investigate Credit Suisse in the context of observation activities.”

“This investigator will clarify the relevant corporate governance questions, particularly in relation to the observation activities,” a statement said Friday.